Glis minor Kowalski, 1956

Colombero, Simone, Pavia, Giulio & Carnevale, Giorgio, 2014, Messinian rodents from Moncucco Torinese, NW Italy: palaeobiodiversity and biochronology, Geodiversitas 36 (3), pp. 421-475 : 453-454

Glis minor Kowalski, 1956

( Fig. 7 C-I)

Glis sackdillingensis minor Kowalski, 1956: 384 , text fig. 2f, pl. 4, fig. 8.

Glis minor – Kowalski 1963: 545, text figs 8-10 (cum syn.). — Hordijk & de Bruijn 2009: 66, pl. 27, fig. 9. — Angelone et al. 2011: 99, fig. 6, 15. — Hellmund & Ziegler 2012: 84, pl. 4, figs 9-18.

Myoxus minor Daoud, 1993: 213 .

Glis minor minor – Daxner-Höck & Höck 2009: 406, fig. 13 (cum syn.).

TYPE LOCALITY. — Podlesice, Poland.

OCCURRENCE IN THE STUDIED LAYERS. — MCC3, MCC4, MCC5, MCC7.

REFERRED MATERIAL. — Three P4; four M1; six M2; six p4; four m1; two m2; two m3. Further details in Appendix 1.

MEASUREMENTS. — see Table 10.

DESCRIPTION

P4

Four main ridges; one to three accessory ridges; centroloph present and connected to protoloph in a single specimen; two roots.

M1-2

M1 and M2 display a very similar structure; M2 generally wider with less convex anteroloph; four main and three accessory ridges; main ridges slightly bent backward on the lingual side; centroloph labially connected to the protoloph in 40% of M1 and M2; three roots.

p4

Four main ridges free on their labial side; anterolophid and metalophid connected on the lingual side; two accessory ridges are present; a small ridge develops between anterolophid and metalophid in a single specimen; a single root.

m1-2

m1 morphologically similar to m2 but more elongated and anteriorly narrower. Anterolophid connected with metalophid on lingual side through an incomplete endolophid; first accessory ridge weakly connected to endolophid in half of the available m1 and isolated in all the m2; centrolophid weakly connected to metalophid in a single specimen; two roots.

m3

Trapezoid in outline; ridge arrangement identical to that of m1-2; centrolophid represented by a small swelling of the enamel in a single specimen; two roots.

REMARKS

The morphological features and measurements of the material from MCC fit well with those of Glis minor Kowalski, 1956 from the type locality of Podlesice (Early Pliocene of Poland) ( Kowalski 1956) and many other European Neogene localities such as Richardhof and Kohfidish (Daxner-Höck & Höck 2009), Węże 1 and Rebielece ( Kowalski 1956, 1963; Daoud 1993), Notio 1 and Komanos 1 ( Hordijk & de Bruijn 2009), Gundersheim 4 ( Fejfar & Storch 1990), and Sondershausen ( Hellmund & Ziegler 2012). The specimens from Rudabanya (Daxner-Höck 2005) are only slightly larger than those from MCC.

Glis sackdillingensis (Heller, 1930) , a common Plio-Pleistocene European species, is slightly larger and has a larger number of accessory ridges in the M1-2 ( Daoud 1993).

The dental pattern of the genus Glis is remarkably conservative, since that of the extant species Glis glis (Linnaeus, 1766) is hardly distinguishable from that of the extinct Miocene species ( Daams & de Bruijn 1995). Therefore, it is extremely difficult to define the phylogenetic trajectories of this genus exclusively based on dental remains. Some authors ( Daoud 1993; Nadachowski & Daoud 1994) hypothesized the reliability of the lineage G. minor– G. sackdillingens–G. glis .

Figures

FIG. 7. — Isolated teeth of Glirulus Thomas,1906 and Glis Brisson,1762 from Moncucco Torinese:A, B, Glirulus lissiensis Hugueney & Mein,1965;A, MGPT-PU127510,M2 sin.; B, MGPT-PU128351,m1 dex.;C-I, Glis minor Kowalski,1956; C, MGPT-PU127494,P4 sin.; D, MGPT-PU127399, M1 dex.; E, MGPT-PU128208, M2 sin.; F, MGPT-PU127480, p4 dex.; G, MGPT-PU128207, m1 sin.; H, MGPT- PU127384, m2 sin.; I, MGPT-PU127387, m3 sin. Scale bar: 1 mm.